Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all
obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
2. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coussins et al. (EP 3031314 A1), hereinafter Coussins, in view of Qin et al. (CN 114365636 A), hereinafter Qin. Regarding claim 1, Coussins discloses a garden tool (30c) comprising: an electric motor (20c) (battery powered; third paragraph of page 13 describing Fig. 4); a housing (34c) formed with or connected to a front handle (76c) and a rear handle (78c) for a user to hold; a first operation switch (14c) disposed on the front handle; a second operation switch (16c) disposed on the rear handle; and a controller (18c) configured to control operation of the electric motor based on actuation of the switches (see Figs. 4-5 in Coussins; Abstract; page 11). Coussins teaches that activation of the switches occurs in sequence before motor operation.
However, Coussins does not explicitly disclose that the controller is configured to start the electric motor according to a sequence in which the first operation switch is turned on prior to the second operation switch in a defined enablement sequence as recited.
Qin discloses a reciprocating cutting device (e.g., a hedge trimmer) including a cutting unit, a driving unit, a control unit, and a switch device with a first switch on a front handle (210) and a second switch on a rear handle (220) (see Fig. 4 of Qin). Qin teaches that the control unit stops the driving unit when an abnormal event such as over-current or blade blockage is detected, and will not resume normal power to the motor until a predetermined operation sequence of the first and second switches is completed (see S104-S106; description of timing Δt1, Δt2, Δt3). Thus, Qin teaches conditional motor activation based on a sequence of switch operations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the control scheme of Coussins to incorporate the sequence-dependent enablement taught by Qin, such that the electric motor is started when the first operation switch is actuated prior to the second operation switch according to a predetermined sequence, in order to improve safety by preventing unintended activation and ensuring deliberate multi-step control of the motor.
It should be noted that claim 1 recites a general predetermined operation sequence of switch operations but does not require the exact timing intervals taught in Qin (Δt1, Δt2, Δt3). Therefore, while Qin provides a concrete example of timing-based sequence control, claim 1 encompasses any sequence of operations that meets the functional requirement, making the claim broader than Qin’s disclosure. The rejection under §103 remains proper because the combination of Coussins and Qin renders the general concept of sequence-dependent motor activation obvious, even though the claim allows more flexible timing than Qin.
Regarding claim 2, Coussins teaches everything noted above including that the controller is configured to start the electric motor when the first operation switch is in the on state first and then the second operation switch is in the on state later. Qin teaches that the control unit will resume power only after a predetermined sequence of actions on the first and second switches is completed, thereby teaching that motor activation follows a defined switch sequence. Therefore, the combination teaches that the controller starts the motor when the first operation switch is in the on state prior to the second operation switch being actuated.
Regarding claim 3, Coussins discloses everything noted above including a lock switch defined by at least one locking switching function of the electronic unit (see claim 8; page 11). Qin teaches that the driving unit is stopped upon abnormal event detection until a predetermined operation sequence is completed, effectively functioning as a sequential lock condition controlled by the control unit. Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed locking behavior.
Regarding claim 4, Coussins discloses everything noted above including that the controller is further configured to control the electric motor according to on/off states of the first operation switch, the second operation switch, and the lock switch (see page 11). Qin reinforces this sequence-based control by requiring both switches to be operated in a predetermined order before the control unit restores power.
Regarding claim 5, Coussins discloses everything noted above including a controller configured to control an electric motor based on actuation of a first operation switch, a second operation switch, and a locking switching function. However, Coussins does not explicitly disclose that the controller is configured to start the electric motor when the first operation switch, the second operation switch, and the lock switch are sequentially in the on state in a specific sequence. Qin teaches that the control unit requires a first switch and second switch operation sequence (e.g., continuously pressing one switch then performing additional operations on the other within predetermined timing thresholds) in order to restore power and resume cutting operation (see S104–S106). It would have been obvious to modify Coussins’ control logic to incorporate such a predetermined operation sequence to achieve deliberate multi-step activation.
Regarding claim 6, Coussins discloses a controller configured to control a drive unit based on actuation of operating elements and a locking switching function. However, Coussins does not explicitly disclose the specific order recited in claim 6. Qin teaches that motor power is not restored until a predetermined sequence of switch operations is completed in a defined timing window, which inherently teaches conditional ordering of switch activations for resuming operation. It would have been obvious to arrange the activation sequence of the switches in Coussins by applying the sequence control of Qin, in order to ensure deliberate multi-step activation.
Regarding claim 7, Coussins, as modified above, discloses everything noted above including a controller that responds based on multi-switch inputs. Qin teaches predetermined operation sequences and timing logic involving the first and second switches, which supports the claimed relationship.
Regarding claim 8, Coussins discloses that when the electric motor is running, the controller is configured to stop the electric motor when the first operation switch changes from on to off (page 11). This is consistent with the concept that the motor will be stopped upon abnormal events or switch state changes.
Regarding claim 9, Coussins discloses everything noted above including that after motor stop, the controller maintains the motor in the stopped state until the correct conditions are met. Qin teaches that if the predetermined operation sequence is not completed within a predetermined time, the motor remains off (see S105).
Regarding claim 10, Coussins teaches that the controller controls the motor to stop. Coussins, in view of Qin, further teaches that the controller is configured to start the motor when multiple switches are actuated in a predetermined sequence as discussed above with respect to claim 5.
Regarding claim 11, Coussins discloses everything noted above including that the controller stops the motor when the second operation switch changes from on to off. Therefore, claim 11 is unpatentable over Coussins in view of Qin.
Regarding claim 12, Coussins discloses controller logic responding to changes in switch states. Qin teaches that the motor is not restored until a predetermined sequence is completed (see S105-S106). It would have been obvious to configure Coussins’ controller to restart the motor when one switch transitions to on while the other is already on based on Qin’s sequence control.
Regarding claim 13, Coussins discloses everything noted above including that the first operation switch can be a pressure-sensing switch, which is in an on state when being held and in an off state when released (page 2; Figs. 4-5).
Regarding claim 14, Coussins discloses a garden tool including the elements above and a controller configured to control the motor according to a sequence of switch activations (see Abstract; page 4; page 11). However, Coussins alone does not explicitly disclose the defined enablement sequence required. Qin discloses that the control unit will not resume power until a user completes a predetermined operation sequence involving the first and second switches (see S104-S106). It would have been obvious to incorporate such sequence control into Coussins’ controller.
Regarding claim 14, Cousins discloses a garden tool (30c) comprising: an electric motor (20c) (battery powered; third paragraph of page 13 describing Fig. 4); a housing (34c) formed with or connected to a front handle (76c) and a rear handle (78c) for a user to hold; a first operation switch (14c) disposed on the front handle; a second operation switch (16c) disposed on the rear handle; and a controller (18c) configured to control operation of the electric motor based on actuation of the switches (see Figs. 4-5 in Cousins; Abstract; page 11). Cousins teaches that activation of the switches occurs in sequence before motor operation.
However, Cousins does not explicitly disclose that the controller is configured to stop the driving unit upon detection of an abnormal event and to subsequently perform a reverse operation of the cutting unit based on completion of a predetermined operation sequence of the switches as recited.
Qin discloses a reciprocating cutting device (e.g., a hedge trimmer) including a cutting unit, a driving unit, a control unit, and a switch device with a first switch on a front handle (210) and a second switch on a rear handle (220) (see Fig. 4 of Qin). Qin teaches that the control unit stops the driving unit when an abnormal event such as over-current or blade blockage is detected and resumes motor operation to perform a reverse operation only after a predetermined sequence of switch actuations is completed (see S104-S106; description of timing Δt1, Δt2, Δt3). Thus, Qin teaches conditional reverse operation based on user-performed switch sequences.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the control scheme of Cousins to incorporate the sequence-dependent reverse operation taught by Qin, such that the electric motor not only stops in response to an abnormal event but also performs a reverse cutting operation when a predetermined sequence of switch operations is completed, in order to improve safety and enhance blockage recovery of the cutting unit.
It should be noted that claim 14 recites the functional requirement of stopping the driving unit and performing a reverse operation in response to an abnormal event. While Qin provides specific timing intervals and detailed examples for the predetermined operation sequence (Δt1, Δt2, Δt3), claim 14 does not require the exact timing; it only requires that a sequence-dependent reverse operation occur. Therefore, the combination of Cousins and Qin renders the reverse-operation control concept obvious, even though claim 14 is broader than Qin in terms of timing specifics. The rejection under §103 remains proper because the claimed functionality would have been obvious in view of the teachings of Cousins modified by Qin.
Regarding claim 15, Coussins discloses everything above including a controller configured to control the motor according to a sequence of switch operations. See rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 16, Coussins teaches everything noted above including that the controller is configured to control the motor to start when the first operation switch is in the on state first and the second operation switch is in the on state later. Coussins discloses the controller and operation switches as discussed above. Qin teaches sequence-dependent restore logic involving the first and second switches, which supports the claimed order of activation.
Regarding claim 17, Coussins discloses everything noted above including a lock switch controlled by either handle.
Regarding claim 18, Coussins, as modified above, discloses everything noted above including a controller configured to control the motor according to on/off states of the first operation switch, the second operation switch, and the lock switch. See rejection of claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 19, Coussins, in view of Qin, discloses everything noted above including sequential activation of multiple switches including a lock function and the predetermined operation sequence taught by Qin.
Regarding claim 20, Coussins, in view of Qin, discloses everything noted above including sequential switching and sequence-dependent motor control as supported by Qin’s operation sequence.
3. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coussins in view of Tang et al. (11,345,011 B2), hereinafter Tang. Regarding claim 1, Coussins discloses a garden tool (30c), comprising: an electric motor 20c (which is battery powered; third paragraph of page 13 which describes Fig. 4); a housing (34c) formed with or connected to a front handle (76c) and a rear handle ( 78c) for a user to hold, wherein the front handle is held by one hand of the user, and the rear handle is held by the other hand of the user; a first operation switch (14c) disposed on the front handle; a second operation switch (16c) disposed on the rear handle; and a controller (18c) configured to control, according to a sequence in which the first operation switch (14c) and the second operation switch (14c) are turned on, the electric motor to start. See Figs. 4-5 in Coussins. It should be noted that Coussins teaches that the operation or activation of the switches are sequential in which the first switch 14c then switch 16c are activated before the electric motor is turned on. See the abstract and the second paragraph of page 11 of the attached translation.
Coussins further discloses that the controller is configured to control the electric motor based on an actuation sequence of the first operation switch and the second operation switch (see Abstract; page 4; and page 11). However, Coussins does not explicitly disclose that the controller is configured to start the electric motor according to a sequence in which the first operation switch is turned on prior to the second operation switch being turned on in a defined enablement sequence.
Tang discloses a trigger switch device including a trigger (1) and a safety switch (2) disposed on a handle (51) of a power tool (see Abstract; Figs. 1-7). Tang discloses that when neither the trigger (1) nor the safety switch (2) is actuated, the safety switch (2) locks the trigger (1) such that the trigger cannot be pressed. Tang further discloses that when the safety switch (2) is pressed, the safety switch unlocks the trigger (1), thereby enabling the trigger (1) to be subsequently pressed to actuate an actuating switch (55) and start the motor. Thus, Tang teaches a sequential activation in which the safety switch (2) must be actuated prior to actuation of the trigger (1) to initiate operation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the control scheme of Coussins to incorporate the sequential enablement and activation taught by Tang, such that the electric motor is started when a first operation switch is actuated prior to a second operation switch, in order to improve safety by preventing unintended activation and ensuring deliberate two-step actuation of the motor. Regarding claim 2, Coussins teaches everything noted above including that the controller is configured to control the electric motor to start when the first operation switch is in the on state first and the second operation switch is in the on state later. Coussins discloses the controller and operation switches as discussed above. Tang further teaches that a first switch (safety switch 2) must be actuated to enable a second switch (trigger 1), which is then actuated to start the motor. Therefore, the combination teaches that the controller starts the motor when the first operation switch is in the on state prior to the second operation switch being actuated.
Regarding claim 3, Coussins discloses everything noted above including a lock switch (defined by at least one locking switching function of the electronic unit 18c; see claim 8). Coussins discloses, “Furthermore, the electronics unit 18a has at least one locking switching function and at least one deadman switching function, which can be selected at least as a function of an actuation of the operating element 14a and / or the further operating element 16a.” See the paragraph before the last paragraph on page 11. Tang further reinforces the concept of a locking mechanism via the safety switch (2) locking the trigger (1).
Regarding claim 4, Coussins discloses everything noted above including that the controller (18c) is further configured to control the electric motor according to on/off states of the first operation switch, the second operation switch, and the lock switch. Coussins discloses, “Furthermore, the electronics unit 18a has at least one locking switching function and at least one deadman switching function, which can be selected at least as a function of an actuation of the operating element 14a and / or the further operating element 16a.” See the paragraph before the last paragraph on page 11.
Regarding claim 5, Coussins discloses everything noted above, including a controller configured to control an electric motor based on actuation of a first operation switch, a second operation switch, and a locking switching function. However, Coussins does not explicitly disclose that the controller is configured to control the electric motor to start when the first operation switch, the second operation switch, and the lock switch are sequentially in the on state in a specific sequence.
Tang discloses a trigger switch device including a trigger (1) and a safety switch (2), wherein the safety switch (2) must be actuated to unlock the trigger (1), thereby enabling the trigger (1) to be subsequently actuated to operate an actuating switch (55) and start a motor (see Abstract; Figs. 1-7). Tang further discloses that the safety switch (2) can re-lock the trigger (1) depending on the sequence of actuation, thereby providing controlled sequential interaction between multiple switching elements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the sequence-based control of Coussins to incorporate the sequential enablement and actuation behavior taught by Tang, such that the controller initiates motor operation based on a defined sequence of activation of the first operation switch, the second operation switch, and the lock switch, in order to improve operational safety and prevent unintended activation.
Regarding claim 6, Coussins discloses a controller configured to control a drive unit based on actuation of operating elements and a locking switching function (see page 7 and page 11). Tang teaches that a safety switch (2) must be actuated prior to actuation of a trigger (1), thereby defining a required order of operation. It would have been obvious to arrange the activation sequence of the switches in Coussins (including the lock switch) in a specific order as claimed, in view of Tang’s teaching of sequential enablement, in order to ensure deliberate multi-step activation and enhance safety.
Regarding claim 7, Coussins, in view of Tang, discloses everything noted above including that the controller is configured to control the electric motor to start when multiple switches, including a locking function, are actuated in a defined sequence. Tang provides explicit teaching of sequential interaction between switches (safety switch (2) and trigger (1)), thereby supporting the claimed sequential activation. Therefore, claim 7 is unpatentable over Coussins in view of Tang.
Regarding claim 8, Coussins discloses everything noted above including a process where the electric motor runs, the controller is configured to control the electric motor to stop when the first operation switch changes from the on state to the off state. The electric motor is stopped when any of the switches are deactivated or when the hand of the operator is removed from the first switch during the operation of the gardening tool while the motor is running. See last paragraph of page 11.
Regarding claim 9, Coussins discloses everything noted above including that after the controller controls the electric motor
PNG
media_image1.png
5
2
media_image1.png
Greyscale
to stop, the controller is still configured to control the electric motor to stop when the first operation switch changes from the off state to the on state. It should be noted that the control unit does not start the electric motor even if the first operational switch changes from the off state to the on state while the second operation switch is in the off state. Therefore, the controller controls the electric motor to stop when the second operational switch is in the off state and the first operation switch is changed from off state to an on state.
Regarding claim 10, Coussins teaches that the controller controls the electric motor to stop. Coussins, in view of Tang, further teaches that the controller is configured to control the electric motor to start when multiple switches are actuated in a defined sequence as discussed above with respect to claim 5. Therefore, claim 10 is unpatentable over Coussins in view of Tang.
Regarding claim 11, Coussins discloses everything noted above including that a process where the electric motor runs, the controller is configured to control the electric motor to stop when the second operation switch changes from the on state to the off state.
Regarding claim 12, Coussins discloses control logic in which the controller responds to changes in switch states. Tang further teaches that actuation of one switch enables subsequent actuation of another switch to initiate operation. It would have been obvious to configure the controller such that, after stopping, the motor is restarted when one switch transitions to an on state while other switches are already in an enabled or on state, consistent with the sequential enablement taught by Tang. Therefore, claim 12 is unpatentable over Coussins in view of Tang.
Regarding claim 13, Coussins discloses everything noted above including that the first operation switch is a pressure sensing switch, the pressure sensing switch is in the on state when being held, and the pressure sensing switch is in the off state when being released.
Regarding claim 14, Coussins discloses a garden tool (30c), comprising: an electric motor (20c); a housing (34c) formed with or connected to a front handle (76c) and a rear handle (78c) for a user to hold, wherein the front handle is held by one hand of the user, and the rear handle is held by the other hand of the user; a first operation switch (14c) disposed on the front handle; and a second operation switch (16c) disposed on the rear handle; a controller (18c) configured to control the electric motor according to a sequence in which the first operation switch (14c) and the second operation switch (16c) are turned on; and wherein the first operation switch is a pressure sensing switch (as discloses that a touch of the operating element is detected and/ or an actuating force or a force exerted on the operating element 14c, 16c is detected by the control unit; see the last paragraphs of page 2 and Figs. 4-5), the pressure sensing switch is in an on state when being held, and the pressure sensing switch is in an off state when being released.
Coussins further discloses that the controller is configured to control the electric motor based on an actuation sequence of the first operation switch and the second operation switch (see Abstract; page 4; and page 11).
However, Coussins does not explicitly disclose that the controller is configured to start the electric motor according to a sequence in which the first operation switch is turned on prior to the second operation switch being turned on in a defined enablement sequence.
Tang discloses a trigger switch device including a trigger (1) and a safety switch (2) disposed on a handle (51) of a power tool (see Abstract; Figs. 1-7). Tang discloses that when neither the trigger (1) nor the safety switch (2) is actuated, the safety switch (2) locks the trigger (1) such that the trigger cannot be pressed. Tang further discloses that when the safety switch (2) is pressed, the safety switch unlocks the trigger (1), thereby enabling the trigger (1) to be subsequently pressed to actuate an actuating switch (55) and start the motor. Thus, Tang teaches a sequential activation in which the safety switch (2) must be actuated prior to actuation of the trigger (1) to initiate operation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the control scheme of Coussins to incorporate the sequential enablement and activation taught by Tang, such that the electric motor is started when a first operation switch is actuated prior to a second operation switch, in order to improve safety by preventing unintended activation and ensuring deliberate two-step actuation of the motor.
Regarding claim 15, Coussins discloses everything noted above including a controller (18c), wherein the controller is configured to control the electric motor according to a sequence in which the first operation switch and the second operation switch are turned on. See rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 16, Coussins teaches everything noted above including that the controller is configured to control the electric motor to start when the first operation switch is in an on state first and the second operation switch is in the on state later. Coussins discloses the controller and operation switches as discussed above. Tang further teaches that a first switch (safety switch 2) must be actuated to enable a second switch (trigger 1), which is then actuated to start the motor. Therefore, the combination teaches that the controller starts the motor when the first operation switch is in the on state prior to the second operation switch being actuated.
Regarding claim 17, Coussins discloses everything noted above including comprising a lock switch (defined by at least one locking switching function of the electronic unit 18c; see claim 8) controlled by the front handle or the rear handle.
Regarding claim 18, Coussins, as modified above, discloses everything noted above including a controller, wherein the controller is configured to control the electric motor according to on/off states of the first operation switch, the second operation switch, and the lock switch. See rejection of claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 19, Coussins, in view of Tang, discloses everything noted above including that the controller is configured to control the electric motor to start when multiple switches, including a lock switch, are sequentially actuated in a defined order, as discussed with respect to claim 5. Therefore, claim 19 is unpatentable over Coussins in view of Tang.
Regarding claim 20, Coussins, in view of Tang, discloses everything noted above including that the controller is configured to control the electric motor to start when the first operation switch, the lock switch, and the second operation switch are actuated in a defined sequence, as supported by the sequential enablement and actuation disclosed in Tang.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s argument in regards to the amended claims 1 and 14 and other claims are moot, since as shown above Coussins in view of Qin or Tang teaches all the claimed subject matter.
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant’s disclosure.
Chiasson et al. (10,600,584 B2) teach a garden tool and switches.
6. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GHASSEM ALIE whose telephone number is (571) 272-4501. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am-5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Boyer Ashley can be reached on (571) 272-4502. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GHASSEM ALIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724
April 3, 2026